Mike Huckabee sets up gay marriage debate for GOP in 2016

Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee took a shot at Republican leaders with a warning that embracing same-sex marriage would cause a severe backlash among evangelical voters who typically pull the lever for the GOP. Given the context of the current Supreme Court cases involving same-sex marriage, clearly there is a recipe for a hot button issue heading into 2014 and 2016.

Evangelicals will leave the Republican Party if it supports redefining marriage to include same-sex couples, Mike Huckabee said.

When asked if he believes the Republican Party will change its position and support gay marriage in a Wednesday Newsmax interview, Huckabee remarked, “They might, and if they do, they’re going to lose a large part of their base because evangelicals will take a walk.”

Huckabee currently hosts a Fox News show called “Huckabee.” He was formerly the governor of Arkansas and ran for president in 2008. Before he entered politics, Huckabee was a Southern Baptist pastor and a religious radio broadcaster.

“And it’s not because there’s an anti-homosexual mood, and nobody’s homophobic that I know of,” he continued, “but many of us, and I consider myself included, base our standards not on the latest Washington Post poll, but on an objective standard, not a subjective standard.”

Huckabee is a potential candidate for the Republican nomination in 2016 and has stated he is open to exploring the possibility of running.

Nate Ashworth is the Founder and Editor-In-Chief of Election Central. He's been blogging elections and politics for almost a decade. He started covering the 2008 Presidential Election which turned into a full-time political blog in 2012 and 2016.

I don’t think most people think about the fact that we will have to stand before GOD at some point and what did or failed to do here on earth will stand with us as an account of our faith and our representation of that faith. The Bible tells us plainly that we shouldn’t accept some behaviors in our presence. We will have to account for that.

Talk about a hollow threat. How can evangelicals “leave” the Republican Party?? Where, exactly, could they go? Dems? Ha! Libertarian? Ha–Libertarians are in FAVOR of individual rights!

Poor Mike is frustrated, and we can understand that, but it doesn’t help to make silly threats. With the strong and growing movement toward gay marriage, the only realistic defense is to say the party should fight for states’ rights, which would be consistent with historical stands, and would even be amenable to Libertarians.

But to cry and say he wants to take his ball and go home just makes him look ridiculous.

I think you could translate “leave” into “stay home.” Look at 2012, huge number of typical GOP voters didn’t vote, by the millions. If that happened, even ticking off a few more million, that’s a hole the GOP can’t dig out of.

Worst case for GOP, a third-party of “values voters” emerges running on the social conservatism platform and draws in a chunk of support. I don’t think it is far-fetched given the undeniably high level of disgust with the leadership in the GOP. By the numbers, there is no way the GOP could abandon social conservatives and still have a path to victory in my opinion. I’m sure they know it at RNC headquarters but they’re trying to lure big donors..

The GOP establishment is going nuts for no good reason. They still have most governorships, most state legislatures, the House for the foreseeable future, solid filibuster power in the Senate (with 5 Dem senators leaving). They just refuse to acknowledge that their “golden boy” was a bad candidate.

I was amazed that they ran after the immigration issue immediately. And now, they seem to be running after gays.

But Romney didn’t lose because the platform was bad. He lost because he is just so out of touch, and has so much disdain for most of the populace.

This is an odd situation. The public mood is moving quickly and strongly toward gay marriage, with liberals and libertarians joining forces. But the California case is odd. A court legalized gay marriage, then the public voted it down in a referendum, then a new court overturned the referendum. Now, the State of California is not even defending its own constitution (with the anti-gay marriage amendment).

My guess is that if the vote were held today, gay marriage would pass, state-by-state, and the Supreme Court has already said it doesn’t want to get ahead of public opinion.

My guess would be that the Court will refuse to overturn the lower court–but rule that it only stands for California, with the rationale that once rights are given, they can’t be taken away. But wasn’t that what Prohibition was all about??

Anyway, that approach will leave it up to the states, and my money would be on a ruling like that.

Here’s another thing: I’ll bet they crush affirmative action within a week of the gay ruling.

“Ha”,I don’t believe you have a relationship with Jesus Christ,how could You not know the truth.Your “Ha” is not at Huckabee,its directed at God’s word. Mike is only the messagener, he is surely does not threaten not is he poor or frustrated.Look ridiculous?
“Where could They go” Your ignorance of the truth speaks for you loud and clear.Some evangelicals,who are in your boat might “follow the growing movement toward gay marriages”, Its their freedom to choose,Yes? God gave them freedom to think make choices.God help you all if you make that choice and never change your mind.”Ha”

Ellen: No, I was laughing at Huckabee. It was just a stupid thing to say. It’s as if people who want gun control said they were going to leave the Democratic Party. Yeah? And go where?

Huckabee could have said that they will sit out the next election, but even that is silly, since there’s so much time before the next election.

As I said elsewhere, it should be a state-by-state issue, since there is strong support in some areas, and strong opposition in others.

So the court should strike down DOMA. On the other hand, it would be dumb to use the California ruling to force all states to recognize gay marriage. I think the court is smart enough to split the difference.

This “Gay Marriage” debacle has to be the first time (in my lifetime) in which subjective reasoning (love) has become grounds to a create law which legally re-defines the “purpose and intention” of marriage.

Soon, we’ll be reading about people who wish to marry their pets because they “love” them.

“When you’re a gay couple getting married, who gets the bachelor party? Who goes downstairs in the middle of the night to check on the noise? Who forgets the anniversary? Who refuses to stop and ask for directions? And which one of you will take forever to get ready?” David Letterman

Dear Christians out there ,wake up, speak up ,stand up for God’s truth “His word is truth,”
I keep waiting for bold,Pastors, brave Children of God to speak up,support the truth about Same sex marriages. I follow,some of the blogs,read what is written there,I find most of them in support of this evil same sex idea, behavior. Maybe I will find the blogs where God’s people are Speaking out,disagree with this same sex marriage Idea.
I pray that some day I will find it.
God loves the sinner, yes,but He hates this Sin.
Yes/No?
Where would the earth’s population be today had God created Adam and Steve Instead Of Adam and Eve?
Man was created with a greater ,higher purpose than to have,same sex marriages, in gratifying his flesh in bed with the same sex or even the oppsite sex.
Yes /No?
Yes,Sex,reproduction was God’s Idea, He created sex to be enjoyed legally between a man, a woman, in a marriage relationship. The main purpose for sex was to reproduce life,to,replenish, fill the earth with other humans like themselves,to enjoy sweet fellowship with God in obedience to his plan came first Yes?.
what do you think???
My heart breaks for some Gay people ,some of them don’t know the truth,or their purpose on earth, or the plan God has for their Lives.
In direct responses,via E-mail some gays,tells me,that many of them simply have not been told the truth,neither do they know the consequences of their wrong choices.
Will you tell them ,God loves them but he hates that lifestyle.If they want to hear this truth,or If they choose to reject the truth It will not change the facts.

But love may not have anything to do with it. The government created a situation where by either your buddy get the money or they do. Some people may like a friend who contributed to a rather lavish lifestyle more than the government which took a large percentage of what they made all the way up and now wants even more. So, same sex marriage prevents them from getting it.

Maybe so. But there’s one thing which won’t be discussed when talking about “Gay Marriage”. And that’s SEX.

Try it sometime. When the topic of a conversation is “Gay Marriage”, try bringing up the “sex acts” which these people do to one another. Then watch the faces of the people in the conversation.

Because these “sex acts” are so disgusting, Taboo and uncomfortable to talk about – usually the conversation devolves into jokes about “munching carpets” and/or “traveling-down-the-ole-dirt-road” in order to diffuse the awkwardness.

Again, I don’t see where sex should enter into this at all. People get married for money all the time and never have or even talk about sex. Hell in many cases they never even meet one another, just fill out the papers and exchange the cash.

I think this whole “Same Sex Marriage” debate will inevitably strengthen the Church. (at least the ones which preach from the Bible) This debate has emboldened the People of Faith. They just have to learn that they live in a society of choice and free will, and that there is little they can do about changing that. They should know now, more than ever, that they need to become “separate” from this decaying world system, as the Bible commands – and live Godly lives.

Look at it this way. The Politicians and the Gay Activists can’t “erase” what is written in the Scripture, however, they will try to stop Preachers from talking about it. Only the “Obedient” Pastors will be speaking what God wants them to say.

This ought to upset everyone. Both Homosexuality / Gay legal unions and Abortions are a personal rights issue. The only two involved are the two immortal souls creating the act and decision. Gay Marriage / Legal Union is, as Billy says, really about money, Insurance and Survivor Benefits. If the two involved get all gooey about being “right” that is between them and their immortal souls; which as all of us are part of – the universal plasma energy of God. Religions are Earth bound created and written and edited by man. And only the Abrahamic religions even give a flying . . . about either of the subjects. When those immortal souls return to the pure energy plane they will be council-led and counselled about their choices and performance and rather it will be recommended for a repeat lesson or if they learned that particular lesson on further understanding of unconditional love.

It has nothing to do with Earthly religions but everything to do with Spirituality and two immortal souls’ lesson plans. As for Gays they should be be given the same rights as any other couple. Abortion is a bit more sticky because of existing laws and did the two immortal souls plan their lesson plan around the incarnation result. I’m sure the two souls knew exactly the results they faced and what would happen to the continuing incarnate existing soul.

Politics – Republicans will remain fragmented and religion is just one barrier to republicans surviving. Extinction will prevail. Conservatism will go underground and we’ll continue bitching, but to no avail. Democrats and Liberals will dance and bounce happily along and drag us through the cycle towards USSA via Totalitarianism, Communism, reaching out for Socialism, and as all great civilizations end after 250 -> 275 years, we will go into a total collapse and who knows how our Grandchildren will deal the outcome.

Again, I’m sick of GOP whining. The ONLY edge Democrats have is the White House, which is pretty much neutered if Congress won’t send the laws they want.

And the ONLY reason the GOP doesn’t have the presidency is that the establishment chose Daddy Warbucks to run at a time when the rest of us are wondering why we’re not seeing any of the record corporate profits and record stock market highs.

Look at 2004: after screwing up Afghanistan, then marching us into his family feud with Iraq, trampling the Constitution, and breaking international law, the whole time, Bush STILL won.

The country is more evenly divided than ever, politically, so neither party “wins.” The election goes to the party that’s not stupid that year.

It is an interesting gamut, though. The GOP establishment knows that warmongers, televangelistsas, and corporatists have nowhere else to go–so they’re trying to raid parts of the Dem block. And while, as Nate says, they could “stay home,” they can “stay home” for two YEARS before it matters–and by then, they’ll be over it.

Have to agree that anyone but Romney could have won. Almost like he was hand picked by Obama. The guy was like 46 out of 50 in job growth. What if the GOP had run the guy at 45 out of 50. He would have had to have done better.

Goethe and Billy – I don’t think any Republican or Libertarian could have won the election. The MSM would not have allowed it.

And the ONLY reason the GOP doesn’t have the presidency is that the establishment chose Daddy Warbucks to run at a time when the rest of us are wondering why we’re not seeing any of the record corporate profits and record stock market highs.

Goethe, think about what you said – Who do you want running your company, a CEO who will keep you out of bankruptcy or one who will drive you into bankruptcy?

Clement, replied “Look, we are not going to strike down a statute just because a couple of legislators may have had an improper motive.”

And, suddenly, the defender of DOMA was saying it was improper.

I still think the Court will strike down DOMA, which is ridiculous, since several states already have laws that negate it. But I think they’ll consider the California issue as applying only to that state. The smart move would be to refuse to rule on California, and force them to rescind their referendum at the ballot box.

I Thank God,and you in this same sex marriage debate. God gave his people freedom to think,see,debate on the same subject with different ideas,for having more knowledge on a subject to share.
Iam learing, about the benefits involved,in the same sex marriages.
Yes? It has to be about more than the sex act.
There was an old woman on Fox news whose partner died after their forty year same sex relationship,
she claims that she lost,paid out of her partner’s estate to the government in taxes over three hundred, thousand dollars that she could have kept had they not been in a same sex marriage. Money is a large part of this fight for same sex marriage privledges.I agree ,and
I admit my ignorance in the money side of this same sex debate,and the sex acts that homosexuals do with each other in their private relationships. I am learning new information through the ideas ,the knowledge that other people,have to share in this same sex marriage debate. Yes,Thank you for opening my eyes in these areas where I was blind before.

Right, if you got a net worth of “0” what do you care about the national debt. Think the people in Cyprus that don’t have a bank account care about how much can be drawn from an ATM? I’ve seen many a person pay $20.00 to have his SS check cashed.

The food stamp people, the government is employees and the unions are pretty united for the Democrats. The GOP is all over the place on almost every issue except war. Even there they do have a dove or two in the ranks.

HELENA, Mont (Reuters) – Montana’s Republican-controlled Senate on Friday voted to put a proposal on the 2014 ballot that would restrict the rights of third parties to compete in general elections.

The measure would ask voters to put in place a new primary election system that only allows the two political parties that get the most votes in the primaries to be on the ballot in the general election.

=====

So called Democracy in Montana. They only want Tweedledum and Tweedledem on the ballot. Don’t want to take a chance on any substantive discussion!!

Always remember that Ventura guy who won a race in Wisconsin a while back as a 3rd party run. Find a tight race where 50% of the people don’t vote with a high negative on just one of you opponents and a 3rd party can indeed win. Don’t think it would have worked last time around with Obama though. All his negatives were from people wwho were not going to vote for him no matter what. All Romney’s negative voters just stayed home.

Ever since Bill Clinton “gave” North Korea the technology to become a Nuclear “threat” to the world – it only stands to reason that his wife, Hillary, should become the next President so she can save us all. And let’s make Chelsea the Secretary of State while we’re at it.

The Republicans haven’t got a chance of winning the White House, unless there be another “event”.

Republicans just have to stop seeing themselves as victims. It’s unseemly and counterproductive–with all that crap about “mainstream media.” “Poor us!!”

Republicans control most of the state houses and even more legislatures. Also, of course, Republicans have had the presidency for 17 of the last 30 years, 23 of the last 40 years, 28 of the last 50 years, and 35 of the last 60 years.

They just have to stop picking idiots, incompetents, and crooks. Who really wants to vote for Nixon, Ford, Dole, or Willard?

The “media” are not out to get you. As I’ve said time and again, they are just lazy. They take the easy story. They don’t do their homework. They don’t do good investigations anymore.

When I watched TV, I spent hours one day, flipping from channel to channel, jotting down what was being said at that moment, and I found that they were all saying the same superficial cliches, even your friends at the canine netowrk. And, of course, there was no sense watching Fox or MSNBC at night, since they were both preaching fantasy to the choir.

I don’t watch any of ’em now, and my guess is that you just plug your head into one network and let them tell you what to think about the others. Give me an example of what you consider this heinous “bias”–something you heard first-hand–and it will probably just be something you didn’t want to be true.

The only news that seems to tell the truth is the Online Alternative Media which is right-up-front about telling it’s viewers that the Democrats and Republicans are essentially the SAME 2 headed – 1 Party MONSTER that is bringing down this Great Nation!

Goethe – most of the regular local news channels are reasonably straight – they will not cover a story sometimes if it derogatory to Obama / Administration – such as Benghazi or “Fast and Furious”. But the national networks consistently fall liberal and protect BHO like he is the world savior. And the MSM advances all of BHO’s campaigns – compare all of liberal anti-gun coverage vs any positive coverage for the 2nd Amendment – i guess you could say they are smart, they never be in a camp

And you wonder why in recent years Pubs had weaker candidates:Here’s the no part: Conservatives are right when they complain about a double standard. Anthony Weiner aside, the media simply salivate more when they’re going after a conservative Republican than a liberal Democrat. The media didn’t want to have anything to do with the John Edwards story, until they couldn’t ignore it any longer. And they even ignored, for as long as they could, all sorts of sexual allegations against Bill Clinton.who had many sexual interludes before his presidency!

But Herman Cain was different from Bill Clinton. With Clinton it was all about sex. Cain’s real crime, as far as a lot of liberals in and out of the media are concerned, is that he is a black man who had the audacity to call himself a conservative Republican. That, to a lot of liberals, is the kind of crime they cannot ignore and will not forgive.

That’s a loaded question as almost all are elected by blacks in almost all black communities. Few exceptions I would think. Big cities like Detroit or small suburbs like Robins (near Chicago) they are all in big trouble.

The reason the media seem to go after “family values” candidates more when they are caught with their dick in the cookie jar is that the hypocrisy is so deep.

And I don’t believe there’s a double-standard there. The media LOVE sex stories. For instance, we heard a LOT about the Russian story about the singing group PUSSY RIOT, because that allowed even the most staid programs to use the word “pussy” out loud. If they had been named the Shirelles, the story probably would never have been covered at all.

Likewise, the only reason you don’t think they adequately beat up on Clinton and Edwards is that NO amount of coverage would have been enough for you. The rest of us were so sick of hearing about it that we wished they would grow up and report on real issues, instead of drooling over any salacious detail they could find.

Most of us wish the media would leave politicians’ private lives out of the “news” altogether, but you have to admit that if someone has spent his whole life wagging his finger at you about how sinful you are, gets caught doing worse than you ever did, that’s a story that should be reported, not because it’s sex, but because of the hypocrisy.

As for Hermain Cain, the story was the denials. And if your problem with Clinton was that he had sex with a subordinate, how is this different?

I do not believe there’s a double standard. The problem is that the media panders to sex–on both sides–and ignores real issues.

I wish politicians would simply say, “it’s none of your business.” That’s what Sanford should have said, too, that it was a personal matter that is not news. The public would rally around that stand.

It gets back to my main point. The media are not biased, they are just lazy. They know it’s a lot easier to sell ads if they’re talking about sex than policy, so that’s what they do. Every time. No matter who it is.

The cold war was just stupid. The USSR was a paper tiger, at best. We “allowed” them to beat their chest, because that allowed us to pump more money into the pockets of the people building our war (hope) chest.

But I’d give the media a pass on WMD.

First, you had the mass hysteria over 9/11. I knew people who were afraid of going to the fricken MALL, because they thought terrorists would pop out of the GAP and get’em.

Then you had the knowledge that the U.S. did, in fact, arm Iraq in the 80s–because they were such good friends of ours. (Remember the pic of Rummy smiling and shaking hands with Saddam?)

So there was (a) fear and (b) suspicion that Iraq still had WMD.

Third, Saddam learned the North Korea lesson, that if you claim to have nukes, the U.S. will leave you alone, no matter what you do. So Saddam tried to give us the impression that he had nukes.

Even with all this, the public was 70% against war. We wanted the inspectors to finish the last 5% of their job.

So this was the brilliant part. Like the old “telephone” game we played as kids, the NeoCons ran a whispering campaign around the world, planting a hint here and a rumor there. Suddenly, Germany was calling Britain about it, France was calling Italy. And everyone had heard the rumors, so it must be true, right?

There was never any evidence, but with the general hysteria, and the rumors that seemed to be everywhere, there was no way to debunk the rampant falsehoods.

When you have people on one side ranting that they are absolutely, positively, no-doubt, completely sure that Saddam had WMDs and the other side is just saying, “are you sure?” No question who will win out, despite the truth.

The media were as much a victim of this concerted campaign as the rest of us, so as much as they are flagellating themselves over it now, there was no way they could do anything then. The only person who really spoke out about the idiocy was Phil Donahue, MSNBC’s highest rated host at the time–and despite his ratings, he was fired, because he didn’t tow the guv’mint line.

We differ in that I think Americans love war. I follow the blogs and it would seems like a high school pep rally to Nuke North Korea. Saddam had 1/2 million poorly trained and equipped troops. Little Kim has 9.4 million pretty well equipped troops.
I know we made short work of Vietnam and Iraq (10 years and counting) but Little Kim just might push back.

me·di·a1 [mee-dee-uh] Show IPA
noun
1.
a plural of medium.
2.
( usually used with a plural verb ) the means of communication, as radio and television, newspapers, and magazines, that reach or influence people widely: The media are covering the speech tonight.

Usage note:
Media, like data, is the plural form of a word borrowed directly from Latin. The singular, medium, early developed the meaning “an intervening agency, means, or instrument” and was first applied to newspapers two centuries ago. In the 1920s media began to appear as a singular collective noun, sometimes with the plural medias.
Goethe – i don’t recall you asking for a media bias – but – let’s take some of today’s topics:
main media – ABC, CBS, NBC. And BTW – your diss of lowly FOX does discuss pro and con and is actually number 1 – their guests and analysts are from multiple political ideologies including other networks (cept MSNBC):
Gun Control vs 2nd Amendment
The real solution to school and mass gathering murders
The long term impact of gun registration
Abortion – pro and con
Marriage vs civil union
Benghazi – 6 month coverup
Gun Running – Final Fast and Furious – no penalty to ATF
Gun Running – Benghazi and Libyan rebels w/ jihadists & al-Qaida
Black conservative bias, even if oreo’s – which they are not and actually black liberals who are oreos and on “the reservation”
Watch on Wednesday when your Savior rolls out his budget proposal

Sam: All blather. We know what issues you want to harp on, and if reports are not biased in YOUR favor, you complain. That is, your real complaint is LACK of bias that you like. And, obviously, you haven’t seen or heard the reports, anyway.

Point to a STATEMENT you believe is unfair and untrue. That’s what I asked for–an example, not a vague complaint.

Agnew started the “bias” gambit because the media were reporting that the Vietnam War was not going well. Well, duh. Kill the messenger because our current wars are a waste.

Agnew started the “bias” gambit , Oh I think it was started long before that. Ever watch those old new reals they use to play at the movie houses. I think they were even before TV but I thought the TV was invented way before they even had electricity.
Anyhow them WWII ones made it look like the whole thing was just a mopping up exercise for the American soldier.

Thought my TV was on the hummer as I watched them as the color went off about the time they started.

Goethe – the subjects i asked about are current today and how the media reports them, or doesn’t report (covers-up), or as you have on multiples, believe them irrelevant, especially if the Administration tries it’s best to ignore them.
Especially two big and controversial:
Benghazi and
Gun control vs the real solution to the present issue.

Kind of like the drug companies in that there in no money in curing a person the money is in treating the condition. Many if not all these politicians are just fighting over who gets to spend the money. A few may actually think that they do create jobs by taking the money from the private sector and spending it on their pork barrel projects. Read something like that in a history book section called WPA.

Billy – i agree with you to a certain extent, but gov controlled media follows the Administration’s liberal lead of outlawing several types of guns + Regs, next register all guns, next take away all guns. However, if it was a conservative administration, the MSM would be screaming 2nd Amendment and personal liberties. And as you say, the real solution is different than the symptom, which is proper protection throughout the school system (Hey, there some government Bucks) until parents start raising their children not to be Scitzo’s. No amount of Gun Control could have prevented Sandy Hook, Aurora, or Columbine or any others – it’s the Skitzo’s and the Criminals and they will always find guns. it’s like Hash, Weed, Coke or H – if i really needed or wanted a toke, snort, or hit / line, i could find it.

Not even discussing the real intention of the 2nd Amendment. BHO’s end game

Seems like some songs play better in certain sections of the country. I live in Florida, the easiest state in the nation to get a gun or I would think. I’m from Chicago,one of the toughest place to obtain a gun. People in Florida fight gun control laws, people in Chicago want more gun control laws.

Billy – guessing it was a few years ago you were at Fitz – changed dramatically in the last 35 years. I lived in South Aurora for nearly 10 years (due S. of Fitz 10 miles). It is very crime ridden now with crime and deaths near the Denver rate. I’ve been playing Golf at Fitz for over 40 years and did a lot of Navy time at Buckley. There is such memories of Ladies where your stationed or recovering – met a true love in San Diego but had to come back home and leave her.

Guess it was a few years back at that ’cause it was a nice area then. I was a lifeguard in the army and developed some sort of lung problem that never did bother me but they sent me out there for what turned out to be an extended stay because I didn’t have that much time left. Getting discharged from there took a lot more time than it should have but I sure had a lot of free time.

Billy: You’re off the rails. It has nothing to do with how one sees things.

This was about Sam assuming that since I don’t agree with his extreme NeoCon agenda, I must necessarily be on the other extreme.

I let the two of you go back and forth, guessing that I was PART of the media, just because I have repeatedly said that conservatives are not doing themselves any favors by playing “victim” of some supposed media conspiracy. (The media wouldn’t work hard enough to conspire.)

When, then, Sam charged that I worked for “a” media, the falsehood coupled with the awkward phrasing was too great to pass up.

Billy: If “seeing things a different way” means being just plain wrong, well, ok. And finally, to put that to rest, I am not now, nor have I ever been a news professional. I just think they should be criticized for the right reasons.

But here is how I should have explained it:

If someone claims to be an authority and expert on the media, but doesn’t know how to even use the word, that says something, in and of itself.

Oh, for sure I would agree with you 100% if I were a college grad but as you know I got my GED in the Army. Didn’t they get Henry Ford in some court of law and showed the world how “stupid” he really was. If I turned off my spell check you might see how little education I have. I took you to be a woman school teacher by your posts. Difference is I’m not telling you that’s what you are or were. I believe everyone until I have reason to believe otherwise.

Billy – I got my GED 1st year in the Navy and later went to Univ of CO-Dnvr for 7-1/2 yrs at nite towards my EE. This is the only Domain I comment on but email about 30 friends. I couldn’t survive without spellcheck and a dictionary website. if you don’t need those tools for this type of comms, you’re either too learned or it’s your profession.

I challenge Goethe to try and get him out of the closet. everything he says except to badmouth me is to create an abstract debate, pitch negativity, and frequently to put my country at fault for whatever subject. Goethe has been at odds with me on every single subject, except one.

I am straightforward, use my real name and my real photograph as an icon, make no bones about being an old warhorse (73) rode hard and put away wet more times than probably 95% of the people on this comment domain. My ideology is also out there and i do speak my mind and it can be changed but i need a valid reason.

You caused me to take the underlying scheme of money as the goal for many things but to me it is still power and control, but that takes money. As for NK and the ‘Fatboy’ – money may be in the background but it is really power and control – he is still a boy (28) and must prove to his military and citizens his manhood and show Park Geun-hye, who has only been in office for a year that he is the man that controls Korea. this happens with every leader change over there, regardless NK or SK. sometimes a person can be well educated but zip common sense and unless the fatkid listens to China who finally started talking openly last week he is about to let his alligator mouth and actions overload his canary butt.

These blogs for the most part are not like math where there is an absolute right answer. Like Mr Behr (as I call him) seemed like a lady school teacher to me the way he posted and you saw him as a news journalist. Now you think the media is bias and Mr Behr thinks they are lazy. He sure defended the media on that WMD that Saddam had as reported by the MSM. My take is that they are an extension of the long arm of the government. I do respect Mr Behr’s opinion that they are just lazy but money has to enter into this equation at some point along the line. I can go either way and I often take the opposite side just to get a reaction. I learn a lot more by disagreeing than agreeing. Like if I agree I probability already knew it.

Sam is “stuck” in the Right/Left Paradigm – created and designed by the government-controlled media for people like him – so that he’ll argue and debate with people who are also “stuck” in the same Right/Left Paradigm – who are also like him.

We see this all the time. Rush Limbaugh inadvertently describes to-a-tee his own audience and calls them Low Information Voters. These voters really believe there is a DIFFERENCE between Democrats and Republicans. They “ignore” the FACT that Democrats and Republicans govern the same way on the important matters facing our country and are completely “duped” by all the minor issues for which they differ.

These MILLIONAIRE “Politicians” are driven by what-is-best-for-themselves and NOT for what is best for the Republic or it’s people. They are “controlled” by Special Interest MONEY and govern only for these Corporate psychopaths. For the rest of us, it’s Austerity, cuts to Social Security and Medicare, deletion of our Civil Liberties, invasion of our Privacy, Government Run Healthcare, Tickets, Fines, Taxes, Penalties, etc. (Did I mention Taxes?) Now they are planning on “stealing” our 401k’s.

And WHO is doing all this? It’s the Republicans and Democrats “working together”. That’s who!

DT: Yeah. That was the amazing thing about Ron Paul. He brought together the common sense of both sides. And if you looked at his ENTIRE program, you could see how it would work to everyone’s benefit. That’s why he had to be silenced.

Rand is trying to co-opt that audience, but at the same time, he’s trying to tow the establishment party line. You can’t have it both ways, and we have seen that his ambition is for his own position, not in speaking truth to power.

As noted elsewhere, polls showed that 70% of the public did NOT want the Iraq War–until we had boots on the ground, then sentiment turned 180 degrees, because if we have our kids in harm’s way, we don’t want to see them torn apart. And that, in itself, illustrates our concern for fellow humans.

On the other hand, all humans fear what they do not understand. So when we’re threatened (verbally) by a fat kid only Dennis Rodman can understand, it’s reasonable for folks to get belligerent.

Oh, I don’t think China sees it your way although they did tell him to tone it done in public. Nice to have a 9.4 million man army defending you boarder though. Yeah it costs China but money well spent and chump change compared to what the US has to spend every time he opens his mouth. We are 6900 miles from NK and the postage is pretty steep on military hardware.

Billy: I didn’t say anything about China, but it’s clear that they want to have a role on the world stage.

Most people don’t know it, but the United States didn’t give up our control of part of China until 1943. We have short memories about what we’ve done to other peoples, but they don’t.

Most of all, people want security. China is not happy about the economic and social influence of South Korea. They would hate to have the North fall. But they know that the North is a basket case, which they have to support.

In many ways, many ways, the relationship of China to North Korea mirrors the US relationship to Israel. In most ways, the benefit is going only one way. And the smaller partner does outrageous things they can get away with, because they know their “big brother” will beat you up if you bother them.

China likes having NK as a thorn in our side, just as we like that China has to worry about the power and influence of India and others.

You did mention the “fat kid”. I guess what I wanted to state was the “fat kid” has friends in very powerful places. China has a 4.2 million man army. Less than 1/2 the size of the “fat kid’s” but even better equipped. We need nukes a lot more than the “fat kid” does if war were to come. The US has about 2.2 million soldiers. I think that “fat kid” speaks 4 languages, not that that makes him smart but he is very capable of learning. He also has a great teacher, China.

Billy: I hope you’re not trying to whip up a cold war with China now. I think they are more embarrassed than anything. They would prefer the fat kid to sit down and shutup.

But you do bring up an important point. In Michigan, some Neanderthal is trying to beat foreign languages out of the high school. After all, how can that help drones we need to feed the corporate machine?

The opponents are making lame arguments about international trade, and needing to communicate with them, but that’s almost as bad as the people who say “those” people don’t need book lernin’.

The REASON learning foreign languages is important is that ideas are made up of words, and each language has a different way of assembling and relating those words and ideas. So if you learn a different language, what you’re really doing is training your brain to break out of one, common routine, and be more expansive, more creative.

If Kim really does know four languages, the importance is not the number of hours he spent in class–it’s about how agile and circumspect his mind can be.

In business as in war the idea is to get a strong economic leverage on your opponent.
When “fat boy” talks we spend a lot of money and it cost China nothing. We use our fuel for our military, China uses theirs for industry. North Korea’s army defends China like real cheap. Ours cost billions and billions. That’s economic leverage, big time.

DT – how very strange, you might have had one too many margaritas, Sam is “stuck” in the Right/Left Paradigm – created and designed by the government-controlled media for people like him
1) There is only Liberal and Conservative even if your you are a Libertarian like me and mix them.
2) The mainstream media bias is what Goethe and I were arguing government-controlled media
3) Low Information Voters that Rush defined about six years ago are the voters who listen only to the government-controlled media
4) Our ideologies are very much in sync except for the politicians. Most are exactly as you say but Republicans are weak and disconnected and cave to outside influence and government-controlled media

I think it is about 65% of the voters vote straight ticket and the democrats have the edge here. Those that cross don’t really know anything about the guy running just go by the last name, race, and sometimes religion. They know nothing about the platform.

DT – Strange again – that you should use the liberal definition, like Wiki, and similar, which may have been the case in the early nineties when the Democrats were trying take back control. But here in the present, when Rush talks about LIV’s he is referring to those who are uninformed, listening only to the ‘Govt-controlled media’, talking heads of Hollywood, doing no research, and specifically the propaganda of the present Administration.

Rush Limbaugh is a Rich, Fat-Cat Neocon Entertainer. He has absolutely NOTHING IN COMMON with any of us. His audience also has absolutely NOTHING IN COMMON with him. He goes on-the-air for 3 hours everyday working very hard to sustain the Right/Left Paradigm to keep Americans “fighting” amongst themselves.

During the campaign, Rush Limbaugh mocked and criticized Ron Paul stating that “He will destroy the Republican Party”. I mean – Really? Do you believe that Ron Paul was out to destroy the GOP? The fact is Neocons have destroyed the GOP. They’ve turned the GOP into a Warmongering – Constitution usurping Bunch of Fascists who have, with the help of the Democrats, turned this Nation from Free Market Capitalism into a Crony Corporatocracy.

You may think I’m just singling out the Republicans. I’m not. The Democrats are just as bad.

Rush Limbaugh “preaches” that Republicans are somehow “different” than Democrats. That is the furthest thing from the truth and he is quite DISHONEST for saying that. But the Low Information Voters who believe that nonsense make up much of his audience. “EVERYTHING is BHO’s and the Democrats FAULT”, he says. Yet, he NEVER equates any “BAD” with what the Republicans/Neocons have done. I think that’s quite disingenuous, unfair and unbalanced. Republicans and Democrats BOTH govern AGAINST the “Will” of the People. The NDAA is just one example. Banker Bailouts are another. Spending us into $17 TRILLION in Debt and then entertaining us with the Fiscal Cliff and the Debt Ceiling “Circuses” is still another. There are many many MANY more. Just look at the important issues. They always AGREE and we always get “screwed”!

DT – you bring up many valid points. There are many RINO’s turning into democrats, not Libs but democrats and as Billy says, “show me the money and voters – and you have my Yea from the floor”. Every once in awhile Rush says something good but most of it is BS and i don’t listen to or watch him. I went back to FOX because Murdoch said he was going to make a course change and has. Besides O’Reilley and Hannity, there are several conservative lites and many guest liberals that appear on FOX for some good debates – besides they have the Foxiest Foxes on FOX.

It is still the MSM-ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, AP, Reuters, Al Jazeera, & BCC that the most L.I.V.’s look at and some right-winger L.I.V.’s that hang on to Rush.

Either way – the media must kiss a$$ to BHO or the Administration will stick a bat in their butt and defund their management as much as he can.

Ron Paul could have saved us but he was 76 and wasn’t a RINO or a TEA so they wouldn’t let him in. A NEW Libertarian party and Constitutionalist is the only hope. And i don’t believe there is enough energy left to sell the MSM to that side.

As I mentioned earlier watch how the MSM deals with BHO’s budget Proposal. Back to the name of the thread – Huckabee is a hybrid that lets religion influence him and i don’t watch him on FOX either.

Ron Paul could have saved us. Now that I can drink to because he did state exactly how he was going to do it unlike every other candidate on stage. He did lack a track record but the game plan was so simple he didn’t need one. Scrape 5 major leeches off the host and let the soldiers spend their pay checks here. Really simple.

More importantly and what will be telling is watching how the GOP deals with BHO’s Budget Proposal.

All the important issues which will negatively impact the populous as a whole and that most of the people don’t want implemented, they will AGREE UPON and screw us to-the-wall. All the minor “crap” will look like a “dog-fight” and these PSYCHOPATHS will begin their acting – right on cue. And that’s what the MSM will be reporting. It’s all by design to keep us fighting.

Both parties are doing very well for themselves. Seems like our politicians are at the top of the food chain for the most part. Great that they were able to put themselves in such a position to receive benefits that most of us can only dream of. The place is indeed run like a plantation and they are doing a lot better today than the slave owner of old who was lucky to see a 10% return on his investment per slave.

Billy: I don’t think the Democrats pick the Republican candidate. But it does seem that “someone” picks weak candidates intentionally.

Dewey was such a prig that he had to be hard to vote for. Stevenson was aloof, and seemed to be a sacrificial lamb to the war hero. Even Ike didn’t like Nixon. Goldwater’s time had clearly not come, and seemed to be thrown in to prove that conservatives couldn’t win. The Johnson/Humphrey dynamic seemed to be the same as Eisenhower/Nixon. McCarthy’s time had quickly passed, and seemed to be thrown in to prove that liberals couldn’t win. Ford had just paid his dues, so he got a shot at his own term. Carter was one of the few sitting presidents who were challenged in their own party, but he had paid his dues, too. Mondale was next-in-line, but not serious. And who can forget the long-shot train-wreck, Dukakis? Then, again, Dole had paid his dues, but was anybody in the party serious? And don’t get me started on Willard, the one candidate who could assure that America wouldn’t fire its first Black president.

Time after time, when the establishment wanted someone to win, “somehow” a weak candidate has been found for the other side.

I’d like to think so but following other blogs the American voter wants war and Johnson was a dove. You are right in that few even knew he was running. Great track record too. That is if you were interested in jobs and the economy.

Billy: But that’s only because the parties, Republican especially, keep changing the rules, so it’s harder and harder for a third-party candidate to be heard.

The most important thing would be to change the debate rules. If a candidate can get ON the ballot in enough states to win 270 Electoral votes, he or she should be on the stage. But they’re afraid of that. So they’re also going to the states, such as here, and making it impossible to get on the ballots.

Hey, I’d do the same thing if I could make the rules. It’s all about me and to hell with the country. Looks like the voters wouldn’t have it any other way. We didn’t get the 17 Trillion dollar debt in just one election cycle.

Now here’s some interesting news from ShadowStats! This article exposes “Politicians” from both CORRUPT Political Parties from an Economist point-of-view. It shows how these “Politicians” CHANGED THE RULES on things like Inflation and the CPI. However, people who are awake know better!

No Liberal wants the impeachment to start on Obama for “dereliction of duty” and a separate agenda for capture of Stevens co-joined with the gun-running to al-Quida thereby giving the “stand-down” order multiple times.

These elected and/or appointed officials are real pros as ducking questions. Remember watching to best of the best, Oliver North. Like they had this guy dead to rights. After listening to him for 30 seconds, it was all the governments plan and no one did anything wrong. I thought Hillery was pretty good too.